Heroes of Might & Magic 7

[Zboj Lamignat]

"Fact"? It might be a game a bit more rich in content, but HoMM II is a much more coherent package - and definitely superior in some respects (Diablo vs Diablo 2 is a valid comparison, now that I think of it). You can't say that Heroes III is flat out "better" in every possible way while keeping a straight face. If you have your preferences - that's fine, but spare me that miserable smiley, it doesn't make your point any more valid.

Yes, it is a fact. Your initial post is based on vague stuff like "atmosphere" and while I agree that graphic, music and general mood of II is better (but it's not like there's a huge difference so it's more a matter of a personal preference), gameplay and mechanic wise III is an improvement on every possible front. Literally the only thing I like more in II is the fact that gold was more of a thing there and even when playing on lower difficulty levels you weren't able to buy everything by week 2-3. And again, that's more of a personal preference since I saw a shitton of people playing on normal difficulty where the buildup or the fact that factions have different "power vs price" difficulty curves don't matter at all and enjoying it.

Campaigns - well, here I don't have an opinion, really. I admit I only every finished one HoMM campaign. But from what I've seen the objectives and scenarios were more varied in III while II had the advantage of branching with some unique rewards.

 

[Black]

Only the delusional "HoMM III was my introduction to the series, so it's the best by default" camp could consider the campaigns, music and overall atmosphere of II to be worse

Kay, let's go a bit further.
Only the delusional "HoMM II was my introduction to the series, so it's the best be default" camp could consider the campaigns, music and overall atmosphere of I to be worse.

 

[VonVentrue]

Kay, let's go a bit further.
Only the delusional "HoMM II was my introduction to the series, so it's the best be default" camp could consider the campaigns, music and overall atmosphere of I to be worse.

Is this the best you could come up with? Really?

 

[Black]

Actually, you came up with that.
It's really stupid, but it's an argument you used.

 

[Cadmus]

I never understood the people who really played the MP in Homam. I played a few maps but it's such a bad premise imo -incredibly time consuming, lots and lots of waiting, if HotSeat you are effectively maphacking each other, 2-5 hours of game time for 1 final battle. Tons of problems with the MP.

I guess this makes my perspective different from you MP players because I just always played the random scenarios or preset maps. I'm still disappointed how little recognition Homam4 gets because it was different while people mostly cheer for that horrible abomination that is HomamV BECAUSE it was different.

 

[dibens]

There, fixed it for you. HoMM III's predecessor was much more focused in terms of design, to its unquestionable benefit - I can't extend the same compliment to the sequel, which merely took the "and a kitchen sink, too..." approach to the series, often forgetting that "more" (creatures, spells, classes) does not equal "better". Quantity over quality in this particular case.
Only the delusional "HoMM III was my introduction to the series, so it's the best by default" camp could consider the campaigns, music and overall atmosphere of II to be worse, and it is the exact same group of self-entitled, ignorant, overly vocal dunderheads (ergo: the absolute worst fanboys in the history of digital media, bar none) that ruined the series forever by preventing The Forge from ever seeing the light of day.

Sorry to disappoint, but HoMM3 wasn't my first game in the series. Yes, HoMM2 is extremely charming in terms of presentation, but that pretty much ends there. To me the game is not about the campaigns, never was. Shit, I've never even played many of them in all these years. The greatness of the game lies in player made scenarios, random generated maps and multiplayer with bros. HoMM3 is just a bigger and better game in that regard, deal with it.

Also, lol, you are going to talk about focused design in one sentence and then lament the fact that forge was scrapped in other.

But hey, nobody forces you to like it. Just don't pretend that vast majority of the fanbase prefers it only because of nostalgia. Also, there's HoMM3: Succession Wars mod that brings the best of both worlds together, so we can end the hate and start the love.

I never understood the people who really played the MP in Homam. I played a few maps but it's such a bad premise imo -incredibly time consuming, lots and lots of waiting, if HotSeat you are effectively maphacking each other, 2-5 hours of game time for 1 final battle. Tons of problems with the MP.

With set time limit per turn and quick combat enabled, it's actually not that bad. Also, in hotseat, the screen goes to black whenever you end the turn so the other player can turn the monitor or laptop to his side before proceeding. Overall I do agree that the best multiplayer experience is still co-op hotseat. There is no downtime as you can watch your friend play and sending each other resources and exchanging troops/spells adds another layer to the strategy. Really, a perfect entertainment on saturday while you warm up for the club and have to focus on other things between turns. Also great for travel.

I'm still disappointed how little recognition Homam4 gets because it was different while people mostly cheer for that horrible abomination that is HomamV BECAUSE it was different.

I don't think people like HoMMV because it's different, on the contrary, mechanics wise it's pretty much what a HoMM3 sequel should be. The only problem is that it's wrapped in a foil of shitty presentation, performance and setting.

 

[Ulrox]

I'm still disappointed how little recognition Homam4 gets because it was different while people mostly cheer for that horrible abomination that is HomamV BECAUSE it was different.

Heroes 4 was hated by a lot of Heroes fans when it came out because it deviated too much from the formula. Jon Van Caneghem has expressed his annoyance with constantly having to remake the same Heroes of Might and Magic game over and over again, probably because the fans dislike too much deviation. I recently looked at an R/games thread on reddit about Heroes 7 and where the series had to go, and mostly people just want a game as good as Heroes 3 that is actually polished.

Apparently having Heroes on the battlefield spamming potions of immortality to destroy everything isn't what Heroes of Might and Magic is about, although I personally enjoyed doing exactly that a great deal.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

The main reason to hate HoMM 4 is because it wasn't finished. I enjoyed the graphics, the stories, the units and the gameplay change. Even if it was a move from the RPG base to a TBS.

Heroes on the battlefield did not work well because they did not scale the XP well enough. It was too easy to snipe another hero. If the hero constantly drinks immortality potions then streamline it.

Fanbase bitch but in the end, Heroes 6 sold enough to be profitable I believe. Heroes 5 did well and even Heroes 4.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Heroes is for 2 things :

- Chill.

- Play multiplayer

Chill fighting a dumb AI, enough to keep you not falling asleep. Enjoy the pretty graphics, developing your armies, finding things across the map. Good fun to relax.

Play multiplayer for the challenge.

 

[GrainWetski]

Don't forget the music

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

I never understood the people who really played the MP in Homam. I played a few maps but it's such a bad premise imo -incredibly time consuming, lots and lots of waiting, if HotSeat you are effectively maphacking each other, 2-5 hours of game time for 1 final battle. Tons of problems with the MP.

I never understood the people who really played the SP in Homam. The fact that these series are pretty basic works in its favor in MP (especially in hot seat), but I can imagine getting bored rather quickly when playing SP extensively.

And it was discussed to death, but IV wasn't hated only because stuff like bugs, being unfinished or different. Many design decisions in that game were poor and done in an incredibly underwhelming and half-assed manner.

 

[Cadmus]

The thing with playing against the AI is that you get to have more fun with your hero. It's a game of wits for you and game of trying to blindly overwhelm you for the AI and that makes it fun for me. I posted some stuff about the magic and skill system in this game already so I'm not gonna repeat it, only say that in the context of the SP it makes the game so much fun and it's the best magic system with the best spells in the whole series and I played all of them except 7.

 

[VonVentrue]

Actually, you came up with that.
It's really stupid, but it's an argument you used.

Cherry-picking a sentence out of context proves that someone's stupidity here knows no bounds, indeed.

My argument was that sugarcoating HoMM III while downplaying HoMMII's obvious strengths doesn't do the series any favours, if anything, such blind fanaticism only led to its downfall (enforcing lore changes was but the first step).
I'm not going to pretend I didn't enjoy every minute spent with III or that I don't love it to bits, but I can't shake the feeling it lost its way in the quest for "more of everything" and I'm still not sure I appreciate the overall shift in tone on display there. The only area it clearly succeeds at compared to its predecessor is the editor, and that alone explains the game's incredible longevity. Everything else is pretty much hit-and-miss.
Art direction, overall aesthetics, music and atmosphere I've already mentioned. Incredibly important points. It's just as jarring a jump from the lavish, lovingly drawn world of II to the quasi-realistic, crude one in III (talking about the towns and units here for the most part, the maps are generally fine) as it was from World of Xeen to M&M6. Nowhere near as severe admittedly, but my point still stands.
The campaigns - incoherent, muddled mess of a plot. Merely a few missions per story arc. No side switching. II is a clear winner here. Oh, and dibens - if you don't care about this particular aspect of the overall package, fine, but choosing to dismiss it "just because it's all about multiplayer FOR YOU" reeks of disingenuousness. Are you interested in a fair comparison or picking only those special aspects of HoMMIII which best suit your argument, sweeping the rest under the rug?
What about the scenarios, then? Which ones felt more like lovingly crafted worlds for you to discover as opposed to bland, generic, multiplayer-oriented maps?
III is riddled with all kinds of annoyances - the sense of uniqueness when it comes to faction design is lost (overly similar unit costs and stat distribution reflect this), leading to the generic/"balanced" feel and overall lack of diversity, there's honestly no incentive to adapt your play style to better suit the needs of your town or prepare for the challenges that lie ahead. The exact same complaint applies to the hero types at every faction's disposal. A (noticeable) step backwards.
Every bloody creature features an upgrade - and precisely one at that. Flying creatures feel no different than your average footmen, try them out on the battlefields of HoMM II and spot the disparity. Again, that "balanced across the board - to a fault" feeling.
Lest I forget - the big one. The entire economic system is totally backwards, and I'm sure countless people pointed that out before me. The need for territorial conquest and map exploration has been rendered largely irrelevant due to the plausibility of the idea of unit production sustained indefinitely off of money-generating structures.

Just off the top of my head, haven't played both in quite a while now, I might be forgetting something important.
Hardly "an improvement on every possible front gameplay and mechanics-wise", eh, Zboj Lamignat? I'd say they both have advantages/disadvantages one should carefully consider.

 

[dibens]

Are you interested in a fair comparison...?

...lovingly crafted worlds for you to discover as opposed to bland, generic, multiplayer-oriented maps

Talk about fair and balanced comparison

III is riddled with all kinds of annoyances

What is annoyance to you is a feature and/or improvement to me, so the best we can do in this discussion is to agree to disagree and move on.

Just off the top of my head, haven't played both in quite a while now, I might be forgetting something important.

And that's the issue. You are probably a casual player. Just someone who plays the campaigns and moves on to other things. And that's perfectly fine. If I were a casual player I'd claim HoMM4 to be the superior game- to me it has the best music, atmosphere and story. However, those things make only a fraction of the whole experience when we talk about thousands of hours of gameplay. I've been playing HoMM practically non-stop since 2001. They're the first thing I install on my machines. And over all these years in terms of performance, gameplay, community content and multiplayer HoMM3 has always come on top.

 

[VonVentrue]

Talk about fair and balanced

Not seeing your point here, really. Grasping at straws?

What is annoyance to you is a feature and/or improvement to me, so the best we can do in this discussion is to agree to disagree and move on.

Great, lack of faction/hero diversity (among other things) is an "improvement" now. I had assumed that disputing with HoMM III-worshipping folks wouldn't be easy, but we're reaching a new low here.

And that's the issue. You are a casual player.

Oh, forgive me for having better things to do in life than staring at HoMM III 24/7 (as much as I like it). Played it probably a year ago in short doses (by the way, need to revisit the - gasp - horrid-devoid-of-expansions-cash-grabby-I-can't-believe-anyone-loved-the-original-to-bits-if-it's-so-abysmal-on-its-own HD edition I haven't gotten around to toying with yet, as well), but that's probably not "hardcore" enough for you. Shame on me, I'll visit a priest at my local parish tomorrow afternoon in order to confess such a cardinal sin.

Just someone who plays the campaigns and moves on to other things.

You sure do happen to know a lot about my gaming habits. I guess playing HoMM III religiously does give one psychic powers, after all.

And over all these years in terms of performance, gameplay, community content and multiplayer HoMM3 has always come on top.

Last time I checked, community made content did not make it onto vanilla HoMM III's discs. Not a fair point of comparison, though I happen to have admitted the editor is leaps and bounds above what II had to offer.

What you seem to suffer from is an unhealthy "addiction" (dangerously close to rabid fanboyism). It makes you oblivious to the game's flaws, incapable of seeing the bigger picture.
Since that's oviously the case, "let's agree to disagree and move on", as you have been so kind to suggest.

 

[Ulrox]

You sure do happen to know a lot about my gaming habits. I guess playing HoMM III religiously does give one psychic powers, after all.

He has found out the secret truth! The illuminati will not be pleased! We must kill him so that this truth remains a secret!

 

[FeelTheRads]

by the way, need to revisit the - gasp - horrid-devoid-of-expansions-cash-grabby-I-can't-believe-anyone-loved-the-original-to-bits-if-it's-so-abysmal-on-its-own HD edition

What? Is that sarcasm or something? Yes, there's absolutely no point in "revisiting" by playing that edition over the original game. What's your point?

 

[GrainWetski]

You should be grateful that they let you buy a worse version of the game.

 

[Zeriel]

Daily reminder that Heroes 5 could have looked like this

Instead of like this

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Fix your image

 

[dibens]

Not seeing your point here, really. Grasping at straws?

You are asking for a fair comparison between games, yet use such nonsense words like "lovingly crafted worlds for you to discover" and "as opposed to bland, generic" to paint both games, clearly showing your unfair bias and blind nostalgia for HoMM2.

Great, lack of faction/hero diversity (among other things) is an "improvement" now. I had assumed that disputing with HoMM III-worshipping folks wouldn't be easy, but we're reaching a new low here.

Now who's grasping at straws.

but that's probably not "hardcore" enough for you.

Yes, that is an issue. We can't have a proper peer discussion, because you haven't experienced the content enough to pass a valid judgement.

You sure do happen to know a lot about my gaming habits. I guess playing HoMM III religiously does give one psychic powers, after all.

Actually I play HoMM4 and HoMM5 religiously too. I would play HoMM2 more often, but it's just an inferior version of HoMM3

Last time I checked, community made content did not make it onto vanilla HoMM III's discs. Not a fair point of comparison

The games are 15+ years old. If you're intentionally avoiding expansions, custom content and other improvements, you're just being ignorant.

What you seem to suffer from is an unhealthy "addiction" (dangerously close to rabid fanboyism).

Would be a valid point were you not giving it on a gaming forum dedicated to a specific niche genre.

It makes you oblivious to the game's flaws, incapable of seeing the bigger picture.

There's plenty of flaws in HoMM3. I've said many times that the game is far from perfect, but it is way more polished, feature and strategy rich than HoMM2 ever was. Deal with it, boyo.

Since that's obviously the case, "let's agree to disagree and move on", as you have been so kind to suggest.

Finally you're talking sense.

Daily reminder that Heroes 5 could have looked like this

 

[whatevername]

HMM7 epic cheese edition:
If your undead army consists only of zergs of skeletons and ghosts, make 5 stacks of 1 ghost each. Attack an enemy stack with 1 ghost and then hit it with skeletons so it will waste its retaliation on 1 ghost. There's no morale loss for undead, but with other factions you'll get -50 morale real fast with this cheese. As a bonus, ranged units will attack stacks of 1 ghost for MAXIMUM OVERKILL.
Congrats, you've killed 40 ancient behemoths and lost only 5 ghosts!

 

[Zeriel]

http://mightandmagic.wikia.com/wiki/Heroes_of_Might_and_Magic_V_(New_World_Computing)

It's pretty heartbreaking to imagine. Especially the possibility of later Might & Magic RPGs with that artstyle. What the fuck happened to all the artists who were working in the industry at the time, I wonder, did they just retire or were they forced to change their style?

 

[you know what time it is]

A little bit of both. After poking around a bit in the industry (i dont mean just gamedev, but art and design in general) and talking to people who were in or related to it, the state of things is rather fucked. As you know, marketing department is calling the shots these days and apparently 'consumer' responds better to bland and boring shit. It's also cheaper and there's a never-ending supply of mediocre artwork. So you either adapt or just bail on the whole thing.

 

[FeelTheRads]

http://mightandmagic.wikia.com/wiki/Heroes_of_Might_and_Magic_V_(New_World_Computing)

It's pretty heartbreaking to imagine. Especially the possibility of later Might & Magic RPGs with that artstyle. What the fuck happened to all the artists who were working in the industry at the time, I wonder, did they just retire or were they forced to change their style?

It really looks quite a lot like IV. Same style. The sprites are bigger though, and more detailed. I guess in the game they wouldn't have been so big.